Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter September 17, 2019

A root cause analysis of ‘falsely elevated’ oxygen saturation: investigation of pneumatic tube transport and differences between estimated and measured saturation in a critical patient population

Xander M.R. van Wijk, Julie H. Leanse, Abby Poinier, Nir Uriel, Michael F. O’Connor, Stephen G. Weber, Vera Tesic and Iliana Staneva


We thank Alesia Coe, Candis Kunkis, and Steve Zibrat, Drs. Daniel Arber, Nicholas Brown, Valluvan Jeevanandam, Sandeep Nathan, Jonathan Paul, and Gabriel Sayer, as well as the clinical laboratory and nursing staff for their invaluable assistance in this investigation.

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Research funding: None declared.

  3. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  4. Honorarium: None declared.

  5. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.


1. UNOS Policy Department. Additional clarifications to the adult heart allocation system policy language. Available at: Accessed: 25 Jun 2018.Search in Google Scholar

2. McKane MH, Southorn PA, Santrach PJ, Burritt MF, Plevak DJ. Sending blood gas specimens through pressurized transport tube systems exaggerates the error in oxygen tension measurements created by the presence of air bubbles. Anesth Analg 1995;81:179–82.Search in Google Scholar

3. Victor Peter J, Patole S, Fleming JJ, Selvakumar R, Graham PL. Agreement between paired blood gas values in samples transported either by a pneumatic system or by human courier. Clin Chem Lab Med 2011;49:1303–9.10.1515/CCLM.2011.611Search in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Zanner R, Moser N, Blobner M, Luppa PB. [Transport of blood gas samples: is the pneumatic tube system safe?]. Anaesthesist 2006;55:1099–104.10.1007/s00101-006-1069-5Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Boegh Andersen I, Mogensen N, Brandslund I. Stability of biochemical components in blood samples transported by Tempus600/Sysmex GLP robot reception system. J Appl Lab Med: An AACC Publication 2016:jalm.2016.021188.10.1373/jalm.2016.021188Search in Google Scholar PubMed

6. D’Orazio P, Ehrmeyer SS, Jacobs E, Toffaletti JG, Wandrup JH. CLSI C46-A2: blood gas and pH analysis and related measurements. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute: Wayne, PA, 2009.Search in Google Scholar

7. Toffaletti J, Zijlstra WG. Misconceptions in reporting oxygen saturation. Anesth Analg 2007;105:S5–9.10.1213/01.ane.0000278741.29274.e1Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Gunsolus IL, Love SA, Kohl LP, Schmidt M, Apple FS. Low pO2 contributes to potential error in oxygen saturation calculations using a point-of-care assay. Am J Clin Pathol 2017;149:82–6.10.1093/ajcp/aqx152Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2019-07-27
Accepted: 2019-08-26
Published Online: 2019-09-17
Published in Print: 2020-02-25

©2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston